013 744 794 



pennulife* 
pH&S 



E 668 
.S74 
Copy 2 



THE CITIZEN'S DUTY m, JHE TRESE51T CRWS. 



4 



A SERMO]^^ 



t§ , 



'^ v 



I'RKACnKD IN THE 






SOUTH PEESBYTERIAN CIIUPiCJI OF-BROOELYN, 



REV. SAMUEL T: SPEAR, D.D., 



OCTOBER 7th, 1866. 



NEW-YORK: 

N. TIBBALS. 87 PAUK JIOW. 

1866. 



CA: 



SEEM ON. 



"But speaking the Truth in Love" — Epiiesiaxs 4 : 15. 
IXTRODUCTIOX. 

I PROPOSE, in discharging tlie duty assigned for this hovn*, to honor 
the direction of the text. I sliall try to speak the truth, I hope to 
do so in love. My theme is the citizen's duty in the present 
CRISIS. I assume that such a crisis exists. The public mind in this 
country is greatly excited, perhaps .as much so as it was at any time 
during the late "war. We are launched upon a war of ideas, involving 
a collision of intense and conflicting thought. The American peo- 
l)le are manifestly not unanimous as to the jjroper method of recon- 
structing the rebel States. Two theories of doing this work are be- 
fore the public mind. The one may be called immediate recon- 
struction, and the other constitutional reconstruction. "With 
the one the President is identified, and of the other Congress is the 
author. Between these theories, as matters now stand, the people 
must make a choice. What should that choice be? This is the 
Cjuestion which I propose to consider. 

As to the propriety of discussing such a subject in this j^lace, and 
at this time, you will, of course, form your own opinions. My opin- 
ion }^ou have in the fact that I do discuss it ; and for so doing I ofier 
no apology and make no defense. As to the discussion itself, you 
Avill be best able to judge when you have heard it. I do not stand 
in this place as a partisan, but as a Christian teacher, having opin- 
ions to express ujion a subject which I deem of the greatest import- 
ance to the present and future weal of this country. Such a sharp, 
and in some respects embittered, contest as that which now exists 
between the President and Congress, two coordinate departments of 
the same Government, is justly a matter for profound regret. It is 
attended with many perils. It abundantly shows that there is a 
most serious fault somewhere. Neither party is able to decide the 
issue for the other. Both have made their appeal to the people. 
You are a portion of that people, and so am I. Hence I have deemed 
it my duty to investigate the subject, and then do Avhat I can to aid 
you in arriving at a correct conclusion. I shall speak plainly upon 
the theme before us. I beseech you to hear me patiently. 

IMMEDIATE RECONSTRUCTION. 

I begin the discussion Avith the theory of immediate reconstruc- 
tion. Those who adopt this theory insist, that Congress should at 
once concede to the rebel States, taken just as they are, without any 



farther conditions, the right of representation in both Ilonses of Con- 
o-ress. This ought to have been done at the Last session of Congress ; 
and it ouc'ht now to be done at the earliest practicable moment. 
The President and those who support him hold this view. I do not 
adopt this doctrine ; and if you will give me your candid attention, I 
M'ill just as candidly state to you some of my reasons. 

FlKST, I FIND IN THIS THEORY WHAT SEEMS TO ME AN IMPROPER 

ASSUMPTION or EXECUTIVE POWER.— The rebel States, for whose im- 
mediate representation the demand is urged, have been reconstruct- 
ed, if at all, exclusively under the authority of the President himself 
He, and he only, has hxed the terms, witliout any legislation on the 
part of Congress to guide him. He did not consult Congress, but 
proceeded at once to solve the problem immediately after the Rebel- 
lion was crushed. The military part of the struggle was ended; 
and hence the President was not fighting battles, or adopting war 
measures for the purpose of conquest, but rather undertaking to re- 
organize civil society. What right then had he, npon his OAvn au- 
thority, and merely as the Executive of law, to decide this whole 
question, and especially so to decide it as to bind the action of Con- 
gress ? None whatever. General Dix, though he favors the Presi- 
dent's policy, nevertheless expressly concedes that his action was 
" not in pursuance of any constitutional power." I agree with this 
opinion. I am no lawyer, yet I can not for the life of me find the 
President's constitutional authority for his course of action. 

The Article of the Constitution referred to by the President as the 
basis of his action, reads thus : " The United States shall guarantee 
to every State in this Union a republican form of government, and 
shall protect each of them against invasion; and, on application of 
the Legislature, or of the Executive, (when the Legislature can not 
be convened,) against domestic violence." You will mark, " the 
United States " shall do this ; and surely the President himself is 
not " the United States." The phrase evidently means the whole 
people, acting through the National Government, of which Congress 
is an indispensable branch. Louis XIV. once said, " I am the State ;" 
yet the parallel of this doctrine in a modern President will not be ac- 
ceptable to the American people. 

There is, moreover, a decision of the Supreme Court of the United 
States, rendered in a case growing out of the Dorr Rebellion in Rliode 
Island, Avhich expressly declares that Congress must determine when 
a Republican government is organized in a State, and what is such a 
government. The Court says : " LTnder this Article of the Constitution 
it rests with Congress to decide which government is the established 
one ; for as the United States guarantee to each State a republican 
government. Congress must necessarily determine what government 
is established in a State before it can decide whether it is republican. 
. . . Undoubtedly a military government would not be a republican 
government, and it would be the duty of Congress to overthrow it." 
In this ruling of the Court it is distinctly implied that both the right 
and duty of action, as contemplated in this Article, are addressed to 
the Congress of the nation. And if this were sound doctrine in re- 
spect to the rebellion in Rhode Island, then surely it ought to be ap- 
plied to the Great Rebellion Avhich has just been suppressed. Yet 
the President flies right in the A'crv face of this doctrine by assuming 



i 



a power -wliicli, as the Supreme Court decides, belongs specially to 
Congress. He has guaranteed republicaji governments to the rebel 
States, without Avaiting for even the advice of the legislative de^jart- 
ment of the Government. 

It so happens, too, that the Senate of the United States, during 
the administration of Mr. Lincoln, expressed an official opinion on 
tliis subject. The Judiciary Committee, in reporting upon an appli- 
cation for the admission of Senators from the State of Louisiana, held 
the following language : " The persons in possession of the local au- 
thority of ]>ouisiana having rebelled against the autliority of the 
L'^nited States, and her inhabitants having been declared to be in a 
state of insurrection, in pursuance of a law passed by the two Houses 
of Congress, your Committee deem it improper for this body to ad- 
mit to seats Senators from Louisiana, till, hy some joint action of 
both Houses, there shall be some recognition of an existing State 
Government, acting in harmony with the Government of the United 
States, and recognizing its authority." This report was unanimouslj' 
ajilproved. Nobody then complained of this decision ; and yet be- 
cause the Thirty-ninth Congress has acted upon the very same prin- 
ciple, it has been severely denounced. This Congress has been virtu- 
ally asked to act mainly in the capacity of a recording secretary to 
the President. True, each House may judge of the qualification of 
its own members, to see that they have been duly elected, and bear 
Avith them the proper credentials ; but the President is the sole judge 
Avhether the State governments in these I'ebel States have been prop- 
erly organized, and whether they are republican or not. Not so 
thought the Senate, Avhen s^jeaking in the days of the lamented Lin- 
coln. 

It is also a very remarkable fact that the President, in his present 
position, stands contradicted by his own official^-ecord. On the 24th 
of July, 1865, in an official communication with Governor Sharkey 
of Mississippi, he said: "It must, howevei", be distinctly understood 
that the restoration to Avhich your proclamation refers, uull he suhject 
to the vrill of Congress.'''' On the 12th of September, in 18G5, in a 
like communication Avith Governor Marvin of Florida, he said : "The 
government of the State shall be provisional only until the State 
government is reorganized, and the basis of that organization will be 
suhjeet to tlie decision of Congress.'''' Why, then, does the President 
now contradict his own record, and condemn Congress for simply 
doing the A'cry thing Avhich in 1805 he said it Avould have a right to 
do ? I confess that I can not tell. I had supposed that Congress Avas 
not a body hanging " on the verge of the GoA'crnment," but an inte- 
gral part of the Government, in Avhich Avere A-estcd all the legislative 
pow'crs granted by the Constitution. I retain this opinion still ; and 
hence, if I approA^ed the President's terms of reconstruction, I should 
be compelled to protest against the source of those terms, especially 
Avhen they are set in array against the vicAvs of Congress. I find no 
power in the President to do wdiat he noAV claims to have done, 

I PIXD, I>g" THE SECOXD PLxVCE, NO NECESSITY FOR EXECUTIVE AC- 
TION AviTHOUT PREVIOUS CONSULTATION AviTH CONGRESS. — The Presi- 
dent might easily have couA^ened this body immediately after the col- 
lapse of the Ilebellion, or he might have held the rebel States under 
military authority until the regular session of Congress. Either 



6 

course avouIcI have given the Congress of the United States an op- 
portunity to speak of the subject before any policy was adopted. 
The position of things was novel, without any precedent in our po- 
litical history; and there Avas no earthly reason why the President, 
even if he had the power to do so, should take upon himself the 
whole load of deciding all the questions involved. Thei'e was no ne- 
cessity for it. It looks to me rash, especially so in one who had 
been elevated to his high ofHce not by the direct choice of the peo- 
ple, but by the murderous assassination of his predecessor. I have 
always regarded it as an exceedingly unfortunate step. Men in high 
position sometimes commit great mistakes ; even politicians, who 
make a business of managing tlie jiublic mind, do not always cor- 
rectly forecast the future. Occasionally they are sadly disappointed. 

I FIND, IN THE THIRD PLACE, THAT THE MAIN PllOPOSITION UPON 
WHICH THIS TIIEOKY OF IMMEDIATE EECONSTRUCTION IS. NOW^ URGED, 

IS A FALSE PROPOSITION. — If I Understand its advocates, they insist 
that the rebel States have a constitutional right to be represented in 
Congress without any conditions precedent thereto, and hence that 
any delay or prescription of snch conditions is an infringement upon 
the Constitution. Having stopped fighting, they have a perfect right 
at once to resume their places in Congress, and commence voting. 
The very moment the war ceased, the right sprang into being. 
Some go so far as to say that the right was perfect and intact even 
during the war. It was simply not used. 

Now with all men who hold this theory, or any thing that involves 
it, I join issue. What is the case with which we are dealing? It 
is the case of treason — causeless, cruel, murderous. Heaven-defying 
treason — in the first instance that of individuals conspiring against 
the Government, and in the second instance that of political commu- 
nities, called States, organized with all the appliances of State author- 
ity, and levying war against the United States. Now, I ask in all 
candor, whether there be no forfeiture of rights as the necessary in- 
cident of such treason ? Do all things remain just as they were be- 
fore this stupendous crime was committed? If so, then we have the 
strangest government of law, and the strangest doctrine of rights, in 
this country, that were ever known among men. I had supposed that 
treason worked a legal forfeiture of all the ordinary rights of citizen- 
ship, even to that of life itself, and that any thing short of death was 
so much in the way of gratuity to the traitor. I had supposed that 
the disposition to be made of the traitor, was a question to be settled 
by the Government in the exercise of its legal authority. I had sup- 
posed that wlien treason is so general as to become the act of a poli- 
tical community known as a State, involving all the officers of the 
State Government, and especially that Avhen a number of such politi- 
cal communities combine together, actually levy war upon the United 
States, and pursue this work with the desperation of death for four 
long years — I say, I had supposed that such a state of facts, such an 
awful crhne, did at least make a slight cliange in the position and 
rclfition of these communities with reference to the General Govern- 
ment. I know that the doctrine of States and State Rights is recog- 
nized in the Constitution ; but this manifestly applies to loyal States, 
and not to States in the attitude of war against this very Constitu- 
tion. You must not reason about the rights of a rebel State as you 



I 



do about one that is loyal, since the two cases are not at all parallel. 
How, I beg to know, can such a State exercise the right of represen- 
tation in Congress, when, by the terms of its own condition, it has no 
State officers, no Legislature, and no Governor, in the cons-feitutional 
sense, to supply the indispensable preliminaries of the right? The 
State officers themselves are traitors, administering a treasonable 
government over a people involved with them in this common trea- 
son ; and the moment they are conquered the wliole thing, ijDso/acto, 
collapses without any power to y^rovide for the creation of constitu- 
tional successors. Tliere must hence be some action of the Govern- 
ment restoring rebel States to their lost position, before they are in 
a condition to talk about their right of representation in Congress. 
They must be in a condition which makes them legally competent 
to choose a representative. I do not care whether they were tech- 
nically in or out of the Union during the war, whetlier they were 
alien enemies or merely rebellious subjects, since I am utterly un- 
able to see how these people can resume the relations and privileges 
of a loyal people, except by some governmental action to define the 
method, and also to say when the thing is accomplished. Being 
criminals, they certainly can not sit in judgment upon their own case. 
As belligerents vanquished in war, they must accept what the con- 
queror chooses to give. The case is very different from what it 
Avould be in a merely local insurrection, that did not carry wnth it 
the Avhole machinery of State Government. In this case the State 
communities as such, and the individuals as such, in both capacities 
made war on this nation; and, although they did not cancel their 
obligations, they did nevertheless forfeit their rights under the Con- 
stitution wliich they were seeking to destroy. All this clamor about 
the right of representation in behalf of rebel communities, entirely 
overlooks the crime of treason laid to their charge. The doctrine of 
State Rights, such as even rebellion itself can not susj^end, disturb, 
or forfeit, such too as may spring into active exerqise at any moment 
when the rebels choose to have it so, may suit the pupils of John C. 
Calhoun ; but at the bar of common-sense it is a pure fiction, having 
not the slightest foundation in truth. It just plays its metaphysical 
antics Avith the word State, as if the State had a political being dis- 
tinct from the people that compose it, as if the State could be loyal 
and retain its rights as such when the people themselves are traitors. 
I hear an objection just here, coming from the lips of one who 
affirms that the President has changed the whole status of the ques- 
tion by his own action. Yes, I know he assumes to have done this. 
He assumes to have created loyal States out of those Avhich were 
rebel, and which being thus created, are now entitled to be repre- 
sented in the National Congress. But where was his authority for 
doing this independently of the action of that Congress ? I will 
thank any man to show me the clause in the Constitution, Avhich in- 
vests the President with the power to erect a State Government out 
of any materials, constitutional and republican in its form, where 
none exists. It is the business of Congress to provide for this result 
by special legislation. I deny that the President can turn a rebel 
State into a loyal one in the constitutional sense, without the action 
of Congress ; and he certainly can not do it against the will of Con- 
crress. 



I may as well put in another thoixglit at tliis i)oint, to which I ask 
your attention. It seems to me that tliis proposition of uiiforfeited 
State Rights as a plea for immediate reconstruction, reflects quite as 
severely upon the action of the President as it does upon that of Con- 
gress. Wliat right, I beg to know, had the President to interfere 
with the State Rights of these rebel communities ? Did he not 
appoint Provisional Governors, and invest them Avith temporarj- 
jurisdiction over these sovereign States, and sustain them by the 
military power of the Government? Did he not supersede their 
existing State authorities? Did he not, in express contradiction 
of State laws, order the calling of Conventions to remodel the 
Constitutions of these States? Did he not require the sovereign 
})eople to take the oath of allegiance before they should be permitted 
to vote? Did he not say who should be voters, and did he not ex- 
clude certain classes from this privilege ? Did he not insist that the 
rebel States should repudiate the rebel debt, revoke their ordinances 
of secession, and adopt the constitutional amendment abolishingt 
slavery, as conditions to be complied with before they could ex- 
pect to be represented in the National Legislature ? These acts of 
the President are matters of history. If he had done the same things 
in the loyal State of New- York, the people would have cried out in 
rage ; and the Congress of the nation would have at once impeached 
him. It seems then that there is a difference, by the President's 
own showing, between a loyal State and a rebel State. The two do 
not stand on the same basis of political rights and privileges. How 
liappens it then that the President condemns Congress for adopting 
a theory on this subject, of which he himself has given the example? 
The argument against Congress, as drawn from the so-called rights 
of the rebel States, falls with verj^ poor grace from the lips of those 
who indorse the President. It condemns every thing that the Presi- 
dent lias done from top to bottom. It is an utterly lalse argument ; 
but if it be good^ then the President is certainly wrong in all that 
he has done. If it be good, then he had no more right than Con- 
gress to interfere with the rebel States, and esjoecially to prescribe 
to them conditions of representation. It was their bixsiness to re- 
organize themselves, and fill the vacant seats in Congress at their 
own pleasure, and with just the men that suited them best. I advise 
those who denounce Congress to do one of two things — either accej^t 
this consequence of the principle from which they reason, or apply 
the same denunciation to the President. If Congress be guilty, then 
the President is equally guilty. 

I FIND, IN THE FOUETU PLACE, THAT THE FRUITS ATTENDANT UPON 
THE THEORY OF IMMEDIATE RECONSTRUCTION, AS THUS PAR DEVE- 
LOPED, SIIOAV IT TO BE ESSENTIALLY DEFECTIVE. It is a faCt SO UO- 

torious as to admit of no dispute, that the Senators and Representa- 
tives from the rebel States chosen under this policy were, for the 
most i)art, men who, within less than the period of a year, had occu- 
pied oflicial positions, civil or military, in conducting a Avar of trea- 
son against the life of this nation — men Avho could not take the test- 
oath Avithout perjury — men Avho submitted to the national autliority 
simply because they' could not help themselves — men Avho would • 
have been in their graves if the criminal laAVS of the country had 
been executed upon them ; yet Avho appeared in Washington to take 



9. 

part in the legislative counsels of the nation. This is a stavtliiig fact 
in the very outset of the question, not a very flattering commenlary, 
one would think, upon the policy under Avhich it occurs. Was the 
like ever heard of before? True, these men had accepted the situa- 
tion as it is called, just as an infidel consents to die when the Provi- 
dence of God forbids him to live. The thing looks bad. It looks as if 
there were a screw loose somewhere. I for one did not go in for 
putting down the Rebellion, and then setting up distinguished trai- 
tors in official authority at such short notice. A reconstruction tliat 
carries along with it this consequence, is too immediate for my pur- 
poses. It startles nie by the rapidity of the work. It places men in 
the halls of Congress, who as richly deserve hanging as any men 
that ever died on the gallows. It runs directly against all the prin- 
ciples and convictions, which governed the loyal ])eople in their 
efforts to put down the rebellion. The distinguished author of the 
Cleveland Letter may view it as very magnanimous — a genuine feast 
of brotherly love — yet I must say that I am not yet quite prepared 
for such a feast. 

It is equally a fact, as shown by sworn evidence, that the rebel 
States themselves, as reconstructed under the policy of the President, 
are not in a fit condition to enjoy the right of representation in Con- 
gress. Congress took pains to examine this question of fact, appoint- 
ing a special committee for this purpose. The report of that com- 
mittee sets forth the following conclusions on the basis of testimony 
from the lips of hundreds of competent witnesses: 

" 1. The evidence of an intense hostility to the Federal Union, and 
an equally intense love for the late Confederacy, nurtm-ed by the war, 
is decisive. 

" 2. The ruling motive for their submission, for a time at least, to 
the Federal authority, js to obtain the advantages of a representation 
in Congress. 

" 3. Without the protection of United States troops, Union men, 
whether of Northern or Southern origin, Avould be obliged to abandon 
their homes; and they arc everywhere bitterly and relentlessly per- 
secuted. 

" 4. The conciliatory measui*es of the Government have not been 
met half-way; but, on the contrary, the bitterness and defiance 
exhibited toward the United States, are without a parallel in the 
history of the world. In return for leniency we receive only an insult- 
ing denial of our authority. The crime we have punished, they 
parade as a virtue ; and the principles of Republican Government 
Ave have vindicated at so terrible a cost, are denounced as unjust and 
oppressive. 

" 5. They would pay no taxes levied by the United States except 
xipon compulsion ; and they would, if they should see a prospect of 
success, repudiate the national debt. 

" 6. Their own Southern press, without any material exceptions, 
defends the men who led, and the principles which incited, the Rebel- 
lion, and calls npon the President to violate his oath of office, over- 
turn the Government by force of arms, and drive the representatives 
of the people from their seats in Congress. 

" 7. At festivals and in public demonstrations in henor of the Re- 
bellion, they openly insult and scoft"at the national banner. 



10 

" 8, They elect to their most important offices those of tlieir un- 
pardoned Rebel chiefs avIio. violated their oaths and abandoned their 
flao" and in some instances their selection to office of their chief 
mm-derers has been so shameless that even the President, 'at one 
time, would not permit them to enter upon their official duties." 

This statement of the conclusions to which the Committee on Re- 
construction arrived, I take from a recent speech of Judge Shellabar- 
crcv of Ohio. They are conclusions resting on sworn testimony, I 
do not say that such facts are wholly due to the President's policy, 
but that they exist under it, and are not prevented by it. . The grant- 
ing of pardons to traitors by the Avholcsale is well calculated to im- 
press the Southern people with the idea that the Government is not, 
after all, very much opposed to such things. I insist that political 
communities thus marked ought not to enjoy the right of representa- 
tion in Congress. It looks very much as if they wanted reconstruct- 
ing again. As now reconstructed, infamous traitors are in power at 
the South; they hold the State offices, and enact and execute the 
State laws ; they are the men who, under the President's policy, ask 
for seats in Congress ; and Union men, who never bowed the knee to 
Baal, are persecuted, and in many instances, as at NeAV-Orleans and 
elsewhere, murdered for their loyalty. Treason is the passport to 
favor, and loyalty during the war the badge of proscription and dis- 
honor. The greater the traitor, the better the man. This, I confess, 
seems to me a queer kind of reconstruction. It is a very singular 
w^ay of making treason " odious." 

You have, perhaps, read the Address to the American people issued 
by the Second Convention held at Philadelphia, differing in very many 
respects from the First Convention held in the same city, and parti- 
cularly in the fact that it was composed exclusively of loyal Soutli- 
erners, many of whom had to be secretly appointed in order to escape 
the hand of violence. These loyal Southerners draw up a most ter- 
rible indictment of facts against the course pursued by the President. 
They set forth their own condition as the tried friends of this Govern- 
ment, and because they are such, and were such in the darkest days 
of the struggle. Tliey tell us, too, of the unprotected condition of 
the Freedmen. They are credible witnesses. They have lived in 
the midst of the scenes they describe. Bitterly, justly, yea, im- 
ploringly, do they complain that Union men at the South should, in 
the hour of national triumph, be left unprotected by this Government. 
They declare the policy of the President to be their curse and their 
ruin, I believe their Avords. I will believe such men much sooner 
than I would believe unrepentant rebels, especially when the facts 
that from time to time reach the public ear, exactly correspond 
with the testimony. There is no getting rid of the main facts. 
There they are. They stare you right in the face. 

Tell me not to be silent. I have a duty to perform, and you have, 
and I pray God that you may perform it. I have no faith in the 
loyalty of those who persecute loyalty, while they load treason with 
their choicest honors. I have no faith in a public sentiment like that 
which now prevails in these rebel States. The majority of the people, 
abusing the mistaken leniency of tlie Government, are to-day as trea- 
sonable in ihc[Yfecli7i(/s, and would, if they could, be as treasonable 
in their actionj as they were at any time during the war. I am not 



11 

so anxious for immccriate reconstruction that I will consent to take 
these people upon tlic conditions projjosed by tlie President. I pre- 
fer to try again, and, if necessary, I prefer to fight again, I insist 
that it is the duty of this nation to make treason odious and loyalty 
honorable. I insist, in tlie hmguage Avhich the President himself 
once employed, that traitors shall take the back seats and loyal men 
the front seats. 

And then in respect to the Freedmen, never with my consent shall 
they be left where they would be left, if Ave were to close up this 
question according to the policy in question. They fought for us and 
they fought with us ; they were our friends when we wanted friends 
and were very glad to welcome their services ; and now to remit 
them to the tender mercies of our former enemies and their former 
oppressors, Avith no legal care for their interests, with no guaranteed 
equality before the law, Avith the liability to be virtually reenslaved 
by State laws regulating labor, Avould be an act of treachery and 
ingratitude well Avorthy of the curse of Heaven. The moral sense 
of the Avorld Avould cry out against us, if Ave Avere to do this thing. 
This people are poAverless to protect themselves ; they Avant our 
help ; and Ave are in covenant before God to afford the help. AVe 
are bound to be true to the men that were true to us. Shame on this 
nation, if Ave should noAV break faith Avith these allies sought and ac- 
cepted in the hour of our agony ! History Avould scoff at us forever. 

It seems to me, in the fifth place, that immediate eecox- 
structiok on the basis proposed, would leave the avay open 

FOR FUTURE EVILS OF THE VERY GRAA'EST CHARACTER. Let US Stop 

a moment, and see Avhereunto this thing is likely to grow. Grant to 
these rebel States representation in Congress, just as they are Avitli- 
out any additional restraints or guarantees; and I believe that you 
wall sow the seeds of evil for many generations to come. Let me 
state to you some of the as2)ects of tliis peril. 

In the first place, the men Avho led the public mind of the South 
during the Avar, Avould very speedily find their places in the halls of 
Congress. Nothing can Avell be more certain than this. They are 
representatiA'e men, such men as the Southern people delight to hon- 
or ; and to admit them to their seats, you must of course repeal the 
test-oath. You Avill have jierjured traitors creejiing back into Con- 
gress, or rather entering that body Avith flying colors. 

In the second place, the number of these Southern Representatives 
would be A^ery considerably increased, at the next apportionment, 
by the abolition of slaA'ery, since all the colored people, though not 
enfranchised, Avould be counted in fixing the ratio of Southern Re])- 
resentation. This Avould add to the future political poAver of the 
States Ave have conquered. They Avould in this respect be actual 
gainers by the rebellion. 

In the third place, the Southern Senatoi's and Representatives in 
Congress Avould be A'ery certain to be united on all questions incident 
to the rebellion. They Avould represent Southern ideas and Southern 
interests, and make Southern demands. They AA'ould offer themselves 
as a compact body to any political party at the North, that Avould 
accept their services on condition of adequate payment to them. 
They Avould be in the Northern market to be bought at their own 
price. There Avould also be a Northern party ready to pay the 



12 

very higlicst i)rice which it dare pay, for the sake of securinpr the 
lananimous vote of the South ; and it is not at all insupposahle, or 
even inii)rol)ahle, that this party, strengthened by the united suj)- 
port of tlie South, might gain the control of the National Govern- 
ment, It was by just this conjunction of things tliat the South prac- 
tically ruled the country before the Ilebellion ; and by a similar con- 
junction it might do the same thing again. 

Now take these three elements and place them in the political prob- 
lem of the future, if we restore the rebel States with no guarantees 
for that future ; and what are some of the questions almost certain 
to be involved in that problem ? There is the National debt con- 
tracted to pay the expenses of whipping the Rebellion, not very wel- 
come to a people whom we have conquered. There is also the rebel 
debt, worthless now, yet capable of being assumed in whole or in 
part, and which the bondholders, mostly Southern men, would doubt- 
less be very glad to have the Government assvmie, paying a large 
bonus for votes in the way of bribes. There is again the question of 
compensation for the forced emancipation of slaves, in wliich their 
former masters have a great pecuniary interest. There is also the 
system of Pension laws adopted as a testimonial of the nation's grat- 
itude to the soldier and the sailor ; and it would unquestionably be 
very agreeable to the South to have the Confederate soldiers and 
sailors'placed on the Pension list. And besides all this, there is the 
question, already mooted, whether the legislation of Congress, dur- 
in**" the absence of these Rebels from their seats, is to be deemed 
valid. The President himself has put in the entering wedge of this 
idea, in two of his veto messages, by assigning it as one of the rea- 
sons for his veto. I do not suppose that he actually meant to raise 
this question ; but he has certainly opened the way for some one 
else to raise it. And still further, there is the question whether 
slavery itself has been constitutionally abolished, since it may be 
said, yea, it has been said, that the Conventions called by the President 
in the rebel States were nothing but illegal and revolutionary bodies, 
having no right to organize a State Government, or vote upon a 
constitutional amendment, or to do any thing else legally binding on 
the people. 

I am no alarmist ; but I give you my opinion that, if we settle tlie 
account with the rebel States in the way proposed, it will not be 
many years before some of these questions will be launched upon the 
dangerous seas of sectional strife and party politics. The door would 
be left wide open for them. You would hear of those questions in 
Congress ; and you Avould find the rebel States marching in solid 
column in one direction, ready to ally themselves with those who 
would favor their views. Now I want something safer and stronger 
than the proposed theory of Immediate Reconstruction — something 
more radical than what seems to me a mere system of patchwork. I 
want to carry these questions, so far as the thing can be done, be- 
yond the reach of ])olitical parties. I do not want them to be left 
to any system of bargain and sale among those who make a trade of 
politics. I want, if possible, so to rig the ship now that she will 
probably sail safely through the future excitements of the public 
anind. It has cost a vast outlay of treasure and blood to save this 
nation ; and the men wlio have saved it, and not those who sought 



13 

its life, are the proper persons to fix the terms of final settlement. 
It becoiucs the liebels to be exceedingly modest, and wait patiently, 
while patriots sit in counsel on this question. 

I OBSERVIi; FINALLY, THAT THIS THEORY OF IMIMEDIATE EECON- 
STRUCTION IS SINGULARLY EMBARRASSED BY BOTH ITS ADVOCATES AND 

ITS OPPONENTS. I grant most cheerfully, that among its supporters 
are a great many patriotic and true men, whose lionestjr it is not for 
me to question. Yet among these supporters I find — and this is the 
thing which staggers me — all the Southern rebels and traitors — all 
the Korthern sympathizers with the Rebellion — all the men who de- 
nounced, the Avar, and did what they could to embarrass the (Tovern- 
ment in its prosecution — all the fault-finders and grumblers against 
Mr. Lincoln. All these classes seem to be exactly suited with this 
policy. This I look upon as a very sus])icious circumstance in the 
case. It gives me the impression that there must be something not 
quite right about it, and hence that the true men who favor it are 
honestly making a mistake. When such a mau as General Forrest, 
who murdered our troops at Fort Pillow, and others of like character, 
advocate a plan of reconstruction for the rebel States, I think it quite 
time for loyal people to open their eyes, and carefully examine the 
plan. I feel quite confident that what is so universally pleasing to 
traitors, can not be the thing which the nation wants and ouglit to 
have. When traitors shout for an idea, I shall look very thouglitfully 
before I shout. If we both shout, then one or the other of us must be 
wonderfully deceived. 

On the other hand, I find among the opponents of this theory the 
great body of the loyal people, who during the war were as true as 
steel, who supported the administration of Mr. Lincoln, and in 1864 
reelected him with overwhelming triumph. They do not agree with 
the President in his present policy. He does not at all represent 
their views. As to the position of the Army and the Navy, I think 
that the recent Convention of soldiers and sailors at Pittsburg shows 
which way the current is drifting with the men who fought and bled 
for their country. That was a very different Convention from the one 
to which General Forrest found it convenient to send a telegram of 
greeting. The Congress of the nation has also by a very large 
majority taken its ground. It is quite possible, yea, I think it more 
than ])robable, that there may be as much wisdom in the two Houses 
of Congress, as in the best views of any single man, however elevated 
in official position, or penetrating in his sagacity. When you turn to 
the loyal men of the South, the men who opposed treason during the 
war, you find them unanimous in. most earnestly condemning the 
policy of the President. So far as the people have had an o]>j:)ortunity 
to speak through the ballot-box, no man can doubt as to Avhat they 
think. The judgment of Maine and Vermont is already upon the 
record, and soon other States will be heard. The President must 
see, he can not but see, that his policy does not represent the views of 
those Avhose A'otes placed him in power. This great and rising 
excitement of the public mind results from an antagonism between 
the policy of the President and the judgment of a large portion of 
the people. Nothing is more evident than that the President to-day 
occu})ies a position, in reference to the people, widely ditlerent from 
the one he occupied when he Avas sworn into oftice. lie is now 



14 

praised by those who but yesterday denounced him, and now opposed 
by the men who sincerely hoped, and some of them prayed, that the 
mantle of the martyred Lincoln might fall upon his shoulders. We 
hear no more from his lips about making treason " odious." The 
whole tone and temper and drift of the President's mind have been 
changed. There is no doubt of the fact. He may be perfectly honest 
in all this — far be it from me to say that he is not ; yet of the fact 
there can be no doubt. 

My conclusion from this line of argument is, that the policy of 
Immediate Reconstruction as inaugurated by the President, ought 
not to go into eifect. With the President as a man, as a citizen, I 
have nothing to do in this discussion. I simply deal with him as a 
public officer, whose official acts are before the people for review. 
Of these I have spoken freely, without epithet, without passion. I 
meant to do so; and if I have done so, then I have done the very 
thing I meant to do. I want the outstanding questions of this Rebel- 
lion settled as speedily as possible ; yet I should regard it as a very 
dark day for this country, if they were settled according to the pro- 
gramme given us by the President. In my judgment we should be 
in great danger of losing nearly all the benefits Ave supposed we had 
gained at the terrible price of victorious Avar. We should leave the 
country in a condition for endless agitation, even if Ave did not have 
to fight the Avliole battle over again. Let us settle this thing right 
if possible ; and then it Avill stay right Avhen we are sleeping in the 
grave. 

C ONSTITUTI ON AL EEC OXSTRUCTI ON . 

The Congress of the United States has expressed its opinion upon 
the problem of Reconstruction by j^roposing to the people an amend- 
ment to the Constitution, and inserting in that amendment certain 
proA'isions groAving out of, and having reference to, the question. It 
is the judgment of Congress that the Constitution should be altered 
in several respects, properly to meet the exigencies of the case ; and 
as to the nature of the proposed alterations, I shall speak to you 
freely in the sequel of this discourse. It is a good Constitution ; 
yet the fathers Avho framed it, and the people Avho adopted it, did 
not then see and feel Avhat Ave have seen and felt in this age. It is 
fair to suppose that Ave in this age are better prepared to judge as to 
Avhat the country noAV Avants, than the men Avho lived three quarters 
of a century since. We do not disparage their Avisdom in thinking 
that we can improve the National Charter Avhich came from their 
hands. 

In submitting this amendment to the people. Congress assumes its 
OAvn poAvcr of action in the case. It certainly has pOAver to propose 
amendments to the Constitution. This no one Avill dispute. Each 
House of Congress is also the judge of the qualifications of its OAvn 
members. And, moreover, as I have already shoAvn, this question of 
restoring rebellious communities to their forfeited privileges belongs 
)>roperly to the Congress of the United States. The question mani- 
festly is one Avhich should be settled by law, and according to laAV ; 
and in Congress, and not the President, are vested the law-making- 
powers of this Governuient, alike in peace and Avar. The President 
virtually says that he is the sole judge in the case. No, says Con- 



15 

gi'css, this subject belongs more properly to the legislative depart- 
ment of the Government; and it is, moreover, one of so much im- 
portance tliat it is best to incorporate the principles of the settlement 
in the fundamental law of the land. 

You perceive also that Congi-ess solicits the public judgment upon 
this whole question. The policy of the President would settle it at 
once by executive authority without taking the sense of the people. 
The policy of Congress refers the Avhole matter to the sovereign 
people by asking them to amend the Constitution of the country. 
The policy of the President would be virtually a snap-judgment, 
while that of Congress gives the fullest opportunity for the most 
careful deliberation. 

Keep in mind, too, if you please, that Congress does not propose 
to disturb or nullify what the President has done, but simply to make 
some additions thereto. It charges upon the President no usurpation ; 
it takes tlie case just where he leaves it, without reversing a single 
one of his acts, and merely adds what it deems necessary to a safe and 
prudent solution of the problem. It has always seemed strange to me, 
that eitlier the President or anybody else should attack the Congress of 
the United States for so doing. The severe denunciations of Congress 
tailing from the lips of the President during his late tour, filled me 
with surprise. I read his speeches Avith amazement. That whole 
tour, in the conduct of its principal actor, was a most astounding 
spectacle. 

The question has been asked, and it deserves an answer, What 
connection is there between the proposed amendment of the Consti- 
tution and the restoration of the rebel States to their former position 
in the Union? Suppose the amendment to be adopted: what then? 
Would Congress admit Senators and Representatives from these rebel 
States ? I answer, Yes, of course, provided they complied with the 
principles of what would then be the Constitution of the United States. 
The object of the amendment is to open the way for this result. Its 
adoption would be at once followed by wliatever legislation might be 
necessary to this end. The Thirty-ninth Congress was even more lib- 
eral than this, since it admited the Senators and Representatives from 
Tennessee upon its oion adoption of the amendment, without waiting 
to see whether it would be ratified by a sufficient number of States. 
That may have been Avise in the case of Tennessee ; perhaps it was 
politic as an answer to the slanders which have been heaped upon 
Congress ; yet I have very strong doubts as to its expediency. I 
Avould not repeat the thing in the case of a single other State. I 
would wait till the amendment is actually adopted by the requisite 
vote before acting upon the theory which it sets forth. It will be 
quite seasonable to act upon the principles contained in this amend- 
ment, when they become a part of the constitutional law of the land. 

Having stated these preliminaries, I shall now call your attention 
to the amendment itself, section by section. 

(section I.) 

" All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject 
to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of 
the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any 
law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of 



16 

tlie United States; nor phall any State deprive any person of life, 
liberty, or })roperty without due process of law, nor deny to any per- 
son within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 

This section, if adopted, settles the question which the Constitution 
as it now exists, does not, settle, as to loho are citizens of the United 
States, and also of the State in which they reside. Citizens, in this 
sense, will then he " all persons born or naturalized in the United. 
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The citizen of the 
United States wilKof necessity be a citizen of the State in Avhich he 
resides, since the same terms of citizenship apply equally to both. 
Is there any valid objection to this doctrine V Ought not the Consti- 
tution of a Republican Government definitely to fix the meaning of 
this Avord, citizen f Ought not the word to have the same meaning 
throughout the whole country ? Ought not a citizen of the State to 
be also a citizen of the United States, and ought not a citizen of the 
United States to be equally a citizen of the State in which he resides? 
And, moreover, are not " all persons born or naturalized in the United 
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," the proper persons to 
be citizens in this broad sense ? It is enough to ask these questions, 
since they answer themselves. This clause of the section 'carries 
upon its very face its own demonstration. No one can oppose it 
without at the same time opposing the fundamental principles of a 
Republican Government, coming irom the whole people, and existing 
for the ichole people. As to what are termed civil rights, it is de- 
signed to place all the people on the same basis of equality before 
the laws. This is manifestly just. And to guard this point Avith the 
greatest possible care, the section, in three 2)rohibitory clauses, im- 
poses such a restraint upon all State legislation as would interfere 
with the equal civil rights of every citizen in each and every State. 
This prohibition is virtually im})lied in the first clause of the section, 
yet it was thought best to j»ut it in express language. No one who 
is a believer in the doctrine of equal civil rights will object to the 
restriction. Allegiance and protection are correlative obligations. 
The Government that demands the former, is always bound to aftord 
the latter. It must protect those to whom it speaks as the subjects 
of law. 

How Avill this section aftectthe Frcedmen, those who were formerly 
slaves, but are slaves no longer? I answer, just as it will afiect all 
other men. It will recognize them as citizens of the United States 
and of the State in which they reside, and will afford to them pre- 
cisely the same protection which it afibrds to white men, no more 
and no less. While it does not determine the question of political 
franchise, and was not designed to do so, it does guarantee to all 
citizens the equal enjoyment of their civil rights. It knows nothing 
about the color of a man's skin. It precludes all class legislation. 
It makes it inq^ossible for the State to have one set of laws for the 
civil rights of white men, and another set for black men. The laws 
must be equal by affording the same protection to all. As was very 
hai)pily said by the I Ton. Horace INlaynard, like the Lord's Prayer 
and the Ten Commandments, it speaks to men, and of them, simply 
as men. As to personal and civil rights, it meets all the v\-ants of the 
colored population, both North and South, by simply ignoring this 
question of color. 



As I liave no doubt, it Avas the special intention of Congress, in 
proposing this section, to secure a proper protection to tlie colored 
people of the Southern States, to make their freedom a fact, and 
render it impossible to evade this fact by any system of partial and 
unjust legislation. This ought to be done, and it ought to be done 
now, rather than at some future day. It is riglit noio, and it is a 
duty noio. The faith of the nation is pledged to this result. The 
people ought not to consent to any plan of reconstruction which 
leaves this question unsettled, especially when we remember that the 
colored people as yet have no voice at the South in the election of 
those who enact and execute the State laws. I am not willing to 
commit their fate to their former masters in this unprotected condition. 
In the present temper of the South, I should greatly fear that State 
laws in relation to testimony, contract, labor, property, vagrancy, 
and appi-enticeship, enacted with special reference to the Freedmen, 
would virtually reproduce the system of slavery. Every man knows 
that slavery has not been abolished with the good-will of a majority 
of the people at the South. It was a matter of compulsion rather 
than of choice. Southern public sentiment has undergone no essen- 
tial change on this subject. It is to-day just what it has been for 
years past. Hence I am not willing to leave the way open for the 
legal expression of that sentiment against the civil rights of the 
Freedmen. I know that we have been earnestly exhorted from a 
very distinguislied source to trust the South on this subject, es2)ecially 
as this is a progressive age in which some progressive men strangely 
take the back-track ; yet my common-sense has taught me that when 
I trust, I should have sufficient reasons for so doing. I do not in 
this case see the reasons, and this is my difficulty with the trust. I 
do not propose to be deceived on this point. I want to fix things " 
right first, and then trust afterward. Give me this section of the 
amendment, and an honest Congress, and a faithful Executive, and 
then I am ready for the trusting theoiy. 

(SECTIOJf II.) 

■ " Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States ac- 
cording to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of 
persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But wjieu the 
right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President 
and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, 
the Executive and Judicial Officers of a State, or the Members of the 
Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such 
State, being twenty-one years of age and citizens of the United States, 
or in any Avay abridged except for participation in rebellion or other 
crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in tlie pro- 
l^ortion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the 
whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." 
In my comments on this section I grant, in the outset, that the policy 
here proposed, is not all that I think would be perfectly proper and 
just. I believe that the Constitution of the United States ought to 
define a citizen in the political S'^n^io, and that the definition should be 
placed on the broad principle of 'impartial suffrage. I have never 
been al)le to see why a colored man should be politically disfranchised 
for a reason not equally applicable to white men. If he may be 



18 

taxed to support the Government, and may be compelled to fight for 
it, then, like all other men, he ought to have a voice in the clioice of 
those Avho make and execute the laws. He has in the question all 
the interests and rights which belong to Avhite men ; and why should 
he not have the same privileges? If you have a test, whether of in- 
telligence or property, then apply it impartially to all. If you have 
no test, then let all vote. This has always been my doctrine. I have 
always voted for it Avhenever I had the opportunity of doing so ; and 
I think I always shall. The loyal Union men of the South are now 
demanding Negro suifrage as necessary for their own protection. 
This may be a reason with them for the demand ; it may be too a 
good reason; but it is very far from being the highest reason. The 
})lain and obvious justice of the thing is the true reason for impartial 
suflVage. The New-York Tribune has set forth universal amnesty 
and impartial suffrage, as being the truest doctrine for the political 
exigencies of the hour. I am not able to see that these two prin- 
ciples have any necessary connection with each other. As has been 
well said by another, they may both be right, or they may both be 
wrong, or one may be right and the other wrong. I am not in favor 
of tmiversal amnesty to all traitors upon any basis, any more than I 
am in fivor of universal amnesty to all murderers ; but I am in favor 
of impartial suftrage upon its own merits. And if Congress had seen 
fit to submit this specitic question to the people, I should have given 
it my earnest support. Congress has not done so ; and hence with 
this brief statement of my opinions, I shall proceed to consider the 
point that is before us in the second section of the proposed amend- 
ment. 

You perceive at once that population in the respective States is 
' made the basis of representation in the lower Hoiiso of Congress' ; not 
the voting population, but the wAo^e population, including (//^persons 
with the exception of Indians not taxed, and of course including 
those who were formerly held as slaves, and who during the period 
of slavery were counted in the basis in the proportion of three fifths 
of their whole number. Slavery being abolished, this three fifths 
rule of course is at an end ; and noAV it is proposed to count all the 
people, black and white alike. The South, I presume, Avill not com- 
plain of this part of the section. The white people of the South will 
be entirely willing to count the blacks in estimating their represen- 
tative population, since by so doing they add to the number of their 
Representatives in Congress. There is no reason why the North 
should object to the principle, provided it be consistently carried out 
in good fjiith. 

You will observe too, that this section does not decide as to " the 
male inhabitants" who shall in fact constitute the voting population 
of a State. It leaves this question, where it always has been left, 
with the respective States, to bo determined by State Constitutions 
or State Legislation. It does not disturb the old practice on this 
subject. This particular point will of course excite no debate. Con- 
gress assumed that tiie country was abundantly satisfied with the 
tiling as it is, and hence proposed no change. 

The real point Avhere the pinch comes, and about which the con- 
troversy will gather its forces, is the proposed reduction in the 
number of representatives from any State that shall see fit to place 



19 

any class of its male inlialntants,' being twenty-one years of age and 
citizens of the United States, and not gnilty of rebellion or other 
crime, in the list of a non-votinfi population, whether in respect to 
State officers or those of the Federal Government. The section says 
that if any State shall exclude any class of persons from the voting 
])rivilege, then the class so excluded, shall not be counted in estimat- 
ing the number of Representatives in Congress to which that State is 
entitled. This is the principle set forth ; and just here is the difficulty, 
if there be any, with this section. 

As an abstract proposition dissevered from any special relations, I 
think it simply just and fair. It secures a just and equal representa- 
tion in Congress among all the States. It puts them all on the same 
foundation. While it does not forbid the States to exercise the 
power of " denying the election franchise to a part of their people," 
it nevertheless insists " that the political weight of each State in the 
House of Representatives shall be measured by and based upon its 
enfranchised population. If any State shall choose, I'or no crime, to 
deny political rights to any race or caste, it must no longer count 
that race or caste as a basis of political power in the Union." 
Leaving this voting question with tlie State, and being 2>erfectly just 
to all the States considered in their relation to each other, tliis section 
in its moral effect supplies a motive against the formation of political 
oligarchies in the State. It fosters, and to some extent guarantees, 
the democratic principle. Apply the theory to Irishmen, if you 
please. It says, that if the State of New- York shall deny the elective 
franchise to Irishmen, then Irishmen shall not be counted in estimat- 
ing the political weight of this State in the Union, and thus furnishes 
a motive in favor of the political rights and privileges of this class of 
men. Is there any objection to the principle when applied to Irish- 
men ? I suppose not ; and yet I presume that hundreds and thousands 
of them will vote against it. 

Ah ! but, says the objector, there is a negro in this question. 
Well, suppose there is, what of that ? Are you going to forsake a 
good principle because it may have some bearing upon the question 
of negro suffrage, especially in the Southern States ? Let us look at 
the case a moment. There are now no slaves at the South. Tlie 
people are all free by law. The population of the ten States not yet 
represented in Congress is, in round numbers, about four millions 
and a half of white jicople, and about three millions and a half of 
black people. In some of these States the blacks are the most nu- 
merous. Now, if these States deny the elective franchise to the 
blacks, and yet are permitted to count them in the basis of their rep- 
resentation in the lower House of Congress, it will then follow that 
the voters of a white population of four millions and a half will, for 
the purpose of choosing President and Vice-President and Represen- 
tatives in Congress, wield all the political power that is granted to 
eight millions of people in the hitherto free States. In South-Caro- 
lina there are about thi-ee hundred thousand white people, and about 
four hundred thousand black people. And if the political franchise 
be limited to the Avhites, then three hundred thousand whites in 
South-Carolina will have as much political power in the Union as 
seven hundred thousand whites living in the State of New-York. A 
white Southern voter in the ten excluded States would be nearly 



20 

equal to two such voters at the North. . How do you like tliese 
figures? Suppose there is a negro in tlie question ; p)lease to tell ine 
how these figures suit you ? l)o you think it just and equal, that 
the South should entirely disfranchise the colored population, and 
yet claim for that population the right of representation in Congress, 
thus increasing the political power of Southern white men in the 
General Government ftir beyond what is due to their own number ? 
Will you consent to this ? I will not, if I can prevent it, I am of 
the opinion that a Northerner ought, in the political sense, to be at 
least as good as a Southerner. When I vote for the President of the 
United States, I do not want my vote counterbalanced by what would 
practically be two ballots given by a single voter in South-Carolina. 
I cast a single ballot, and let him do the same. I hence like the 
principle set forth in this section, even if there be a negro in it. I 
would present to the Southern States this alternative distinctly : 
Either grant the right of suflrage to the colored people, or acce})t the 
consequence of not having them counted as an element of political 
power to be wielded by white men. Make your choice. If you do 
not think this people fit to vote, then I do not think them fit to be 
represented. Your reasons for denying to them ])olitical rights shall 
be my reasons for denying to you an nnjust and disproportionate po- 
litical power. In reconstructing the rebel States, and adjusting the 
Constitution to the new condition of things, I Avould stand by this 
princi})le to the last. I Avould not have a politically , disfranchised 
popidation used as the basis of power by the very men who insist 
upon this state of things. We must carry the principle. If we do 
not, the rebel States Avill increase their political power in conse- 
quence of the abolition of slavery. 

I am, moreover, in favor of the j^rinciple as the friend of the col- 
oi'ed man. I can think of nothing more likely to be eftectually per- 
suasive with the white people of the South than this very amend- 
ment. It will supply a very powerful argument for enfranchising the 
black population. It makes negro suftVage very largely the political 
interest of the South. I am not sure that it is not the shortest road 
to the result. It is certainly good as far as it goes. It is a good 
thing in the right direction. Perhaps it is all tliat the public mind 
is prepared to receive at the present moment. Wliether it is des- 
tined to be the final proposition of Congress on this subject, I can 
not tell. It is enough for me to know that it is the present issue. 
Hence I take the thing as it is, as it is submitted to me, and go for 
it with all mj'" heart. I do so because it is just and equal as between 
the States theniselves ; and I do so because in my judgment it is a 
long step toward impartial suffrage. 

(section III.) 

" No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or 
Elector of President or Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or 
military, under the United States, or under any State, who having 
previously taken an oath as a member of Congress, or as an officer of 
the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an 
executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution 
of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion 



2L 

against the same, or given aid and coinfovt to the enemies tlievcof. 
But Coiigress may, by a vote of two thirds of each House, remove 
sucli disability." 

You see at a glance that the application of this section is coniined 
exclusively to perjured traitors — traitors who, being under oatli to 
support the Constitution of the United States, engaged in tlie Rebel- 
lion, thus adding the crime of perjury to that of treason. Tliey were 
office-holders, either under the State or under the General Govern- 
ment. In respect to this class of traitors, the section declares tliat 
they shall never hold any office, either State or Federal, unless the 
Congress of the United States, by a vote of two thirds of eacli 
House, shall see fit to remove this disability. The disability does 
not descend to their posterity; it does not affect the great body of 
the Southern people ; it does not destroy the political franchise of 
these office-liolding and perjured traitors ; it does not confiscate 
their property or in any way touch their civil rights ; but it does 
declare that, having violated their oath of office in the commission ot 
treason, they shall not again be eligible to office, unless Congress, 
by the requisite vote, shall judge it best to restore to them tliis priv- 
ilege. Such is the substance, and such the ai)plication of this sec- 
tion. 

Now it strikes me that the disability imposed aims at the men 
upon whom rests the chief guilt of the Rebellion. These perjured 
traitors Avere.unquestionably the great plotters of this treason. But 
for them it would never have occurred. Tlicy were the traitors 
in office ; and they took advantage of their official position to com- 
mit treason against the United States. I hold that such men ought 
to be disqualified for holding office, either State or Federal. They 
embarked in this treason with forethought ; they plamied it ; tliey 
knew Avhat they were doing ; and then they pursued the work till 
their power Avas subverted at an enormous sacrifice to the Govern- 
ment. As individuals, they forfeited all their rights, and rendered 
themselves justly amenable to the punishment of death. They ought 
to be truly grateful to the American people for permitting tliem to 
enjoy any rights, yea, for permitting them to live under a gOA^ern- 
ment Avhich they did their utmost to destroy. In any other country 
no such clemency Avould be practiced toAvard such oftenders. In 
any other country they Avould have met the stern and j)rompt retribu- 
tion of confiscation for some, banishment for others, and caj)ital pun- 
ishment for still others. The ])roposition contained in tliis section 
is exceedingly mild and lenient. It falls immensely sliort of tlie 
offense. If there be any good objection to it, it is on tlie ground 
of its mildness. It moreover places these ofienders on their good 
behavior in the future. If they shall prove their repentance by 
showing a truly loyal state of mind tOAvard the GoA^ernment, then 
there is a provision for removing the disability ; and thus mercy is 
mingled Avith justice. 

The President once told us that Ave must make treason " odious." 
He told us that mercy to the traitor Avas cruelty to the State. We 
believed his Avords, and thouglit tliat he meant to carry them into 
ettect. Sadly disappointed in the President, and finding that his 
plan of reconstruction makes treason honorable and loyally odious 
at the South, we turn to this specific measure of Congress, Avhicli, if 



22 

adopted, will place in the fiindainentnl la.w of the land a mark on 
the traitor. 

Let me add that this measure is needed for the future safety of 
the country. So far as I can judge, these perjured, office-holding 
traitors exhibit no sense of the crime they have committed. They 
have simply been defeated. By a thousand signs they show them- 
selves to be to-day the same men that they Avere during the war. 
They are unrepentant and audacioias Rebels, claiming to have been 
injured, declaring that they Avere simply fighting for their rights, 
and even demanding as a right under the Constitution the privilege 
of sitting in Congress, or holding any other office in the gift of the 
people, just as if they had been peaceful and laAV-abiding citizens. 
Now shall we permit such men — men Avith such antecedents — men 
in such a temper — men to conquer Avhom the nation has poured 
forth torrents of its choicest blood — I say, shall Ave permit such men 
to resume office, and thus be placed in positions of power ? I say 
cmpliatically, No. I do not think it safe for the country. Let these 
official traitors " take the back-seats ;" and then let them stay there 
till an outraged GoA'ernment shall at least have time to take a very 
good observation of them. I do not Avant to see your Lees, your 
Johnstons, your Beauregards, your Hoods, your Forrests, your Ste- 
phens, your Breckinridges, your Slidells, your Masons, your Hunters, 
your men of this cast, Avalking into the halls of Congress, or any 
other halls of official power. It Avill be safe to have these men stand 
back for a Avhile. Let them Avait till we can see how things are 
Avorking. 

But the South Avill never consent to this, says the objector. The 
Southern people are a chivalrous people, and they Avill never permit 
such a mark of humiliation and disgrace to be placed upon their 
leaders. I reply, that if the constitutional majority shall pass this 
section, it Avill then be the supreme laAV of the land, and the South 
Avill have to consent to it ; and further, that if the Southern people 
attempt to resist it by force, then the Government Avill simply give 
them another disj^ensation of military poAver, I do not i>ropose to 
ask traitors as to Avhat they Avill give their consent to, Avhen decid- 
ing Avhat it is best to do in respect to them. As to the bluster of 
traitors, I have long since cured myself of any special timidities. 
The truly loyal men of the South are not offended Avith the measure. 
They like it, and Avould like something much more SAveeping and 
radical. 

But again, the Southern people in their present temper will elect 
no men to office except those Avho would be excluded by this section. 
Very Avell ; if they choose to do so, then let them do so. If they 
can stand it, I can ; if they are so in love Avith treason that they 
must and Avill have perjured traitors to administer State Govern- 
ment for them, and represent them in Congress, or haA'e no officers 
of hxAV, then let them try the experiment, and take the consequences. 
I do not propose to go out of my Avay for the sake of accommodat- 
ing such men or such communities. 

But, once more, if you exclude this ctass you Avill leave no men in 
the community fit to hold office. You shut off all the great men of 
the Soutli, the representative men, the men of brains. Not quite, in 
my judgment. There are at least a fcAV such men as Horace May- 



23 

narcl at the Soutli ; and I think tliat, upon a pincli, cnouc^li of these 
men could be found to do all the necessary Avork of lioldhig office. 
There are also very many men at the South who, thougli guilty of 
treason, are nevertheless not perjured traitors — men too of very de- 
cent intelligence ; and I presume that the Southern people could till 
all the offices with this class of men, even if they did not like the 
Horace Maynards, and men of his stamp. If Avorst came to worst, 
then let them go down to the bottom of society and take common 
men for the service. They probably would not lose much by doing 
it. I see no difficulty here that can not very easily be surmounted. 
A daily Paper in the city of Xew-York, and cf well-known pro- 
clivities, has urged that this section of the amendment, even if 
passed, would be unconstitutional, since it would be virtually an 
" ex-post facto law," by making the law and assigning the penalty 
after the crime was committed. Whether a lawyer wrote that edi- 
torial or not, I can not tell ; but when I read the article, I thought that 
the writer was prodigiously in want of an objection. It is true that 
the Constitution as it now reads, and as it will read, says, that " no 
bill of attainder or ex-post facto law shall be passed." Passed by 
lohom, ? By the Congress of the United States. This clause is 
simply a restraint upon the legislative powers of Congress. Is it any 
restraint iipon the people in respect to their power of amending the 
Constitution in the way provided for by the very instrument itself? 
Not at all. The people may, if they choose, strike out this clause al- 
together. The Constitution itself simply provides for an amendment, 
bxit does not lay down any law as to what that amendment shall be 
or shall not be. This is always left with the people. Hence to re- 
sort to the Constitution to prove the unconstitutionality of an amend- 
ment constitutionally passed, is really one of those wonders of tran- 
scendental logic which it was reserved for this age to supply. I am 
sure that there was no such reasoning in old times. N.ewspapers 
had not then reached the higher grades of editorial championship. 
I think I shall not quit the principle for this reason, especially when 
I remember that a constitutional provision, making a certain class of 
men ineligible to office, is not in the nature of an ex-post facto law 
at all. It does not arrest them for trial, or invade their personal lib- 
erty, but, for reasons of which the people are comj^etent to j'udge, 
simply imposes a disability to hold office. Have not the people the 
right to determine such a question, and so amend the Constitution 
as to make it express their judgment ? I think they have, notwith- 
standing the learned opinion of the New-York editor. 

(SECTIOX IV.) 

" The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized 
by law, including debts incurred for the payment of pensions and 
bounties for suppressing insurrection and rebellion, shall not be ques- 
tioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume 
or pay any debt or obligation inciirred in aid of insurrection or 
rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or 
emancipation of slaves ; but all such debts, obligations, or claims, 
shall be held illegal and void." 

The wisdom of this section is upon its very f:\ce. It makes sacred 
the National debt. ' It also makes it constitutionally impossible for 



24 

the General Government or any of tlie States to assume or pay any 
j)ortion of the rebel debt. It is quite enough for the people to pay 
the expenses of conquering treason Avithout being taxed with the 
expenses of the treason. The usurped authorities of the rebel 
States were treasonable during the war; and surely you would 
not consent that loyal State Governments, when organized at the 
South, should tax the people to jiay the debts contracted by traitors 
in power. Nor do you propose to pay the rebel masters for their 
emancipated slaves. The loss to them, I know, is very great ; but 
those who perpetrate treason must bear the consequences. They 
took upon themselves this liability, and have no one to complain of 
but tiiemselves. These vital points are, by this section, so determin- 
ed as to place them beyond the reach of politics. The section is ob- 
viously a good one. It is just Avhat ought to be incorporated in a 
plan of reconstruction, whose object is to restore to their political 
privileges and powers the very communities out of whose treasonable 
conduct have grown these questions. These questions ought to be 
settled vihen we are restoring them, so as to put them beyond the 
reach of debate after they are restored. No one, I presume, at the 
North will urge any objection to the natm-e of the settlement as here 
proposed. If any one has objections, he will, as I imagine, keep 
them for private use, since they will not j^ay for being published. 
The bondholders of the rebel debt and the ex-masters of course Avill 
not like this section ; it does not move in the line of their interests ; 
and this is a very important reason why it should be passed, so as to 
guard them against temptation on the one hand, and the nation 
against any dangerous agitation on the other. I do not want to 
have the Southern people tempted Avith these questions, or the nation 
periled by them, wlien things shall have returned to their normal 
condition. 

(section v.) 

" The Congress shall have power to enforce, by approjiriate legis- 
lation, the provisions of this Article." If the provisions be adopted, 
then there ought to be power somcAvhere to enforce them, by ap- 
propriate legislation, just so far as may be needful ; and Congress is 
of course the suitable body to be clothed Avith this power. 

You now haA^e before you the plan of Constitutional Reconstruction 
as submitted to the people upon the authority of Congress. My 
opinions of it have been expressed in the course of this analysis. I 
greatly prefer it to the system of Immediate Reconstruction as inau- 
gurated and urged by the President. His system seems to me about 
as defective and Avrong as any thing AA^ell can be. This I endeavored 
to show in the proper place. On the other hand, the plan of Congress I 
hold to be one of eminent Avisdom. It is exceedingly mild in its treat- 
ment of Rebels, proposing the very least that can be proposed in consist- 
ency Avith the new position of things and the future safety of the coun- 
try, I am sorry that the President o])poscs it. I am quite sure that in 
so doing he is making for both himself and the country the greatest 
mistake that a President of these United States ever made. What 
are his objections to the proposition of Congress, and Avhat are the 
objections of those Avho speak and Avrite on his side of the question ? 
That you may see the different aspects of this most important subject, 



25 

I propose before takiug my seat to detain you a moment witli some 
of these objections. 

OBJECTIONS. 

1. It is said for the President — and though the saying is not yet 
liis over his own name, still it corresponds witli some things which he 
has said — that tlie amendment, even if passed, will not be constitu- 
tionally valid, because it Avas proposed by a Congress which declined 
to admit Senators and Representatives from the rebel States. This 
objection, if it has any weight or Avorth, simply denies that the Thirty- 
ninth Congress Avas in point of fact the Congress of the United State's. 
It may be a rump Congress, a " Congress so-called," " a body hanging 
on the A'erge of the Government ;" but it is not the Congress, It is 
a little too late in the day for the President to say this, or any body to 
say it for him, since he has already recognized this body as being \he 
true Congress. It Avas, moreover, chosen by the same votes that 
made him Vice-President. The fact that the States tliat rebelled 

■ Avere not represented in this Congress, has nothing to do with the 
legal A'alidity of the body itself, or any of its acts. They Avere not 
represented in the previous Congress. By their OAvn treasonable 
action they made their seats in Congress vacant ; and Avhen they shall 
be permitted to fill these seats again, is, I conclude, a question not for 
them to decide, or the President to decide, but for Congress itself to 
decide. And the fact that Congress does not agree Avith the Presi- 
dent as to the time or the terms, has nothing to do Avith the legiti- 
macy of its organization, or the reality of its legislative poAver, The 
President's opinion may be entitled to respect ; but on this subject it 
has no authority binding upon Congress, or affecting the integrity of 
its constitutional being. 

2. It has been suggested that Congress may not in good faith act 
upon the amendment even after its adoption. This supposes that 
Congress Avill be untrue to its OAvn proposition. A public sentiment 
that secures the passage of the amendment, Avill also instruct the 
Thirty-ninth Congress as to the Avill of the people, and at the same 
time elect a majority in the Fortieth Congress committed to the prin- 
ciples of this very amendment. This furnishes a very strong- 
guarantee that the plan of Constitutional Reconstruction Avill go into 
eftect, if the people ratify it. Congress Avill at once apply the prin- 
ciples of the plan by appropriate legislation ; and then the excluded 
States Avill have to conform thereto in order to secure their represen- 
tation in Congress. 

3. It has been said, that if we Avait to settle this difficulty in the 
way propo^d, the country may be involved in the dilemma of two 
rival bodies, each claiming to be the true Congress — the one com- 
posed of the Representatives from the excluded States Avith the 
addition of all other Representatives Avho sympathize with the A'lews 
of the President, and the other composed of those Representatives 
Avho dissent from these vicAVS — and moreover, that the President 
may recognize the former as being, in reality, the Congress of the 
United States. This suggestion can of course haA^e no ap})lication to 
the present Congress, since this body is already organized, and as 
such has been abundantly recognized by the President himself. It 
is too late for tlie President to apply the idea to the Thirty-ninth 
Congress, even if he Avere disposed to do so. In respect to the Foi-- 



26 

tieth Congress, tlie one now being elected by the people, I clo not 
see any occasion for being specially alarmed. The suggestion is cer- 
tainly a very poor compliment to the President, since it supposes 
that, in order to carry his ends, he would launch the country into a 
state of revolution and civil Avar. Such an experiment would soon 
satisfy the President that Washington is not Paris, and tliat the 
American people are not Frenchmen. The people have once saved 
the country, and they would save it again were the President to 
attempt any such thing. It, moreover, takes a Senate to make a 
constitutional Congress ; and no man supposes that the Senate, as 
now organized, could be made a party to any such revolutionary 
transaction. And still farther, it requires a majority of all the mem- 
bers of each House to make a quorum ; and hence the people who 
elected the Thirty-ninth Congress can guard themselves against this 
peril in respect to the Fortieth, by simply electing, as I have no doubt 
they will, at least a constitutional quorum not at all in sympathy with 
this plan, if plan it be. They might, if they choose, ask each candi-. 
date beforehand, to which Congress he woiild present his credentials 
in the event supposed, the bogus one to be gotten up by revolution, or 
the Constitutional Congress organized under law and according to 
law. There are not many Congressional districts at the North, I 
should hope, not even one, that would trust a candidate for a moment if 
he were committed to this infamous theory of a bogus Congress. I 
do not impute any such idea to the President. It has been suggested 
as a dangerous possibility, in the first instance by a journal adopting 
the President's views ; and hence I speak of it. The people will not, 
I imagine, feel its force as an argument against Constitutional Recon- 
struction. It is an appeal to their fears, andAvithal a most discredit- 
able imputation against the President. If I were advocating his 
policy, I certainly would not address such an argument to the popu- 
lar mind. 

4. It is said again, that this is not the proper time to tinker with 
the Constitution. First reconstruct these rebel States ; and when 
they are all represented in Congress, then do this work if necessary. 
I answer, that the present seems to me just the time to do it. The 
thing to be done has direct reference to the question of reconstruc- 
tion ; and hence, if you are going to do it at all, you must do it when 
the question is being decided. The time to give medicine is when 
the patient is sick — not before, and certainly not after, he gets well. 

5. It is said also, that the States not yet represented in Congress 
ought to have the privilege of voting upon this amendment. In 
re]>ly let me say, that there is nothing in the action of Congress pro- 
posing the amendnient, or in the amendment itself, to prevent the 
Legislature of South-Carolina, or any other rebel State as recon- 
structed after the model of the President, from voting on this ques- 
tion. South-Carolina can walk arm-in-arm with Massachusetts if she 
chooses, just as she did at the first Philadelphia Convention. Con- 
gress has not said that she shall not do so, and surely the President 
has not said it. But is it not manifestly inconsistent to permit a 
State to vote upon a constitutional amendment, and yet decline to 
permit its Senators and Representatives to take their seats in Con- 
gress ? I grant that under ordinary circumstances this would be 
inconsistent, since the State, if competent to the one, would, ordinarily, 



27 

be entitled to the otiier ; yet whatever inconsistency there may he in 
the present case, is due to the precipitate and exceedingly hasty 
action of the President. The President acted as if lie meant to close 
np this whole question before it could be reached at all by Congress, 
or at least place it in such a position, as to make it exceedingly diffi- 
cult for Congress to reverse or in any way modify his policy. De- 
clining to convene Congress in a si)ecial session, he appointed Provi- 
sional Governors, some of Avhom had been prominent rebels ; lie 
organized the rebel States according to his own notions ; he then 
suspended the functions of these Provisional Governors, and connnitted 
the States to the jurisdiction of their local authorities ; he then, by 
proclamation, declared the Rebellion to be ended, and peace estab- 
lished ; he did all this without a single scrap of legislation to guide him, 
or warrant the action ; and iinally, when the Congress assembled in 
December last, he virtually said to them. Gentlemen, the problem 
of reconstruction is solved ; the President of the United States has 
solved it ; it is a thing already accomplished ; and what remains for 
you, is simply to admit these Senators and Representatives from the 
rebel States to their vacant seats in Congress. Such was the state 
of things Avhich the President foficed upon Congress, seemingly by 
design. Now, in these difficult circumstances, Avhat should Congress 
do ? Should it declare all the acts of the President to be null and void, 
and order the whole work of reconstruction to be done over again 
from the very beginning ? This would have been a very radical 
measure, and in some respects perfectly just ; yet the President had 
carried the case so f;xr without consulting Congress, that such a 
measure w\as beset with very great practical difficulties. Should 
Congress then accept the President's plan, and by its own action 
make it final with no additions thereto ? This was impossible, for 
the simplest and best of all reason, that Congress did not approve 
of it. Kot having been consulted, as it should have been, at the 
proper time. Congress did about the only thing it could do ; it arrested 
the President's plan by refusing to admit to their seats Senators and 
Representatives from the rebel States chosen under that plan ; it 
stopped the plan at this point ; and, after taking time for delibera- 
tion, Congress then proposed to remedy the defects of the plan 
through the agency of a Constitutional Amendment. Hence, if there 
be any inconsistency in permitting these rebel States, as organized by 
the President, to vote on this amendment, "vvhilc their Senators and 
Representatives are not permitted to take their seats in Congress, 
then tliat inconsistency is due to that complication of things of which 
the President is the sole author. It grows out of his improper action, 
and Avould not and could not exist at all if he had consulted Con- 
gress in season upon this whole subject. I suppose that neither the 
President nor his supporters Avill find any fault Avith Congress for 
leaving the amendment open to the vote of all the States. They 
urge it simply as a technical inconsistency, while they have no 
objection to the thing itself; and if it be so, then the President, himself, 
is responsible for this inconsistency. lie, and not Congress, has 
made the case out of which it springs. 

6. But again, Ave are told that the amendment must fail because it 
will require the vote of at least tAventy-seven States to adopt it, and 
this can never be gained; This is merely a matter of opinion. I 



28 

lliink that it ■will be adopted, I have A-ery little doubt of it. At 
any rate, I proi^ose to make a thorough trial of the question. The 
Eastern, Western and Middle States will probably vote for the 
amendment Avithout a solitary exception; and this will almost carry 
it. When the Southern States discover that this amendment is the 
very least that the country will accept; that in this respect it is the 
idtimatum ; and that, if they reject it, they may reasonably expect 
something not quite as agreeable to themselves, I believe that they 
will act the part of sensible men, and take the best they can get. 
Let us try the thing ; we can but fail ; and if we do fail, then we 
shall see what we shall see, and act accordingly, 

I. But ought not loyal States to be represented by loyal Senators 
and Kepresentatives in Congress ? What is the use, my friend, in 
attempting to befool yourself!, for you will not befool the people, by 
ringing the changes iipon these phrases ? Who denies this proposi- 
tion ? Nobody, unless it be the supporters of tlie President's policy. 
It is the very thing which Congress is aiming to secure. We want 
the States that liave fought tliis Government to be loyal ; we want 
them to send loyal Representatives ; we want some reasonable evi- 
dence of tliis state of facts; and As to what this evidence shall be, 
Ave think Congress quite as competent to judge as the President. 

8. Did you not fight the rebel States to keep them in the Union ; 
and if so, Avhy do you noAV keep them o^itF We do not keep them 
out. We simply claim the right, and mean to exercise it, of deter- 
mining upon Avhat principles they shall resume their former relations 
to the Government. Having AvithdraAvn their Senators aiul Pepre- 
sentatives from the halls of Congress for the purposes of treason, Ave 
propose now to say upon Avhat terras those Senators and Represent- 
atives shall again take their seats. With these terms they must 
comply ; and if they Avill not, then they keep tliemselves out. Tlie 
terms of the President are not sufficient to meet the Avants of the 
case ; and hence Congress has made additions to remedy their defects, 
as far as possible. 

9. But the rebel States Avere neA'er otit of the Union ; and if so, 
Avhy are they not entitled to representation in Congress without any 
conditions precedent thereto ? No : they ncA^er Avere out, in the sense 
of being absolved from the laAvful jurisdiction of the Government ; 
but they Avere out in the sense of utterly expelling the authority of 
that Government from the midst of them, and forfeiting by treason 
all their rights under the Constitution, So thought the President 
Avlien he proceeded to reconstruct these States ; and so thinks every 
man Avho has a clear head and a loyal heart, and no party ends to 
subserve. The victorious Government is uoav the party to say upon 
what terms, if any, forfeited privileges shall be restored. 

10. But is there no danger that Southern blood Avill be Avarmed 
up, perhaps to the pitch of another civil Avar, if Ave delay the ques- 
tion for a constitutional amendment ? I propose to take all the risks 
of this. We have already Avhipped one rebellion ; and, if necessary, 
I sui)pose that we can Avhip another. On this subject, I take no 
counsel from my fears. 

II, Is there no danger of foreign complications, and possibly Avar, 
in Avliich event the rebel States, unless reconstructed immediately, 
might join hands Avith our enemies ? I do not propose to take this 



29 

peril, be it great or small, into the account. Tlie suggestion is, upon 
its very face, a menace of disloyalty, very much like the old logic of 
dissolving the Union. If these States wish to try a second rebellion 
in this form, then I shall not bribe their treason to prevent it. Let 
them try it, if they wish to do so. 

12. But would it not on the whole be better to trust our Southein 
brethren, and settle the thing up at once without any delay, taking 
for granted that all things will right themselves afterward ? This is 
about Avhat we find in a very famous letter which has excited not a little 
comment. The idea is a wonderful display of good nature ; but 
whether it is an equal display of good sense, is another question. 
When a man cheats me once very badly, I want some proof of his 
honesty before I trust him the second time. So Avhen traitors seek 
to destroy this Government, I want suitable proof of their loyalty 
before I restore to them the privileges of law-abiding citizens. 
While I nrge no* iindue vengeance for the past, I do demand suffi- 
cient guarantees for the future. We are settling up the accounts of 
the Avar ; and now is the time to do it in the safe and proj^er Avay. 
This I think to be good sense, while not at all inconsistent Avith good 
uatm*e. 

13. Another, reasoning from a very different stand-point, says that 
the proposed amendment does not go far enough to represent all his 
views, especially on the qiiestion of suffrage. I agree Avith this 
indiA'idual, Avhoever he may be. The amendment does not represent 
<ill my Adews. I think it to be the A^ery mildest thing of Avhicli the 
case admitted. ' Yet so far as it does go, I like it ; and Avhen thp 
practical question is whether I shall say i/ea or iicnj to it, then I say 
i/ea with all my heart. It is the only thing noAV submitted to my 
choice ; and approving it as I certainly do, I shall not seek to defeat 
it when that defeat Avould bring disaster to every thing Avliich I hold 
dear and vital in this issue. Congress, remembering that it had been 
the uniA'ersal practice of this country to leave the question of politi- 
cal suffrage to be determined by the States, and that the States, 
both I^orth and South, had adopted different rules upon this siibject, 
did not think it best to propose a new rule, or any rule to be incor- 
porated into the Constitution of the United States. Hence you are 
not called upon to vote upon this specific question. You can not vote 
upon it if you try. You may discuss the question of impartial and 
uniform suffrage; you may freely express your vicAvs ; you may do 
Avhat you can to get the public mind ready for action at a future 
time ; but Avhen j-oucome to the question of present action, you must 
act iipon the thing that is practically before you, and that thing is 
tlie constitutional amendment. You certainly Avill not oppose a 
thing so good in itself, having so many qualities to recommend it, 
because it is not all that you desire, especially Avhen your opposition 
Avould practically place you in the ranks of those Avho Avould, if they 
could, defeat all your desii-es. You certainly Avill not quit your friends, 
and refuse to act Avith them, and virtually go over to your enemies 
in this struggle, because those friends, aa'Iio have just as good a right 
to judge as you, do no^t place the issue upon as high ground as fully 
represents your individual opinion. This Avould not be sensible ; 
and tliis is Avhat I have to say to those friends of freedom, Avho, 
Avhile they object to the President's policy, nevertheless Avish that 



30 

Congress hnil taken Avhat they designate as higher ground. Per- 
haps this liigher groxuid would have defeated the whole thing. 
It is not quite so clear that the States would have ratified an amend- 
ment which, on the question of suflVage, reverses the entire practice 
of tliis country. It was, perhaps, wise to leave this question, just as 
it had always been left, with the States themselves. Congress so 
judged, and hence so acted; and I, for one, do not propose to make 
my theory as to political suffrage an objection to an amendment in 
itself essentially good, because it does not include that theory. I 
repeat again, this is what I have to say to those who are knoAvn as 
extreine Radicals. I use the term in no reproachful sense, but sim- 
ply to mark a class of men. 

CONCLUSION. 

I have now finished the argument upon this whole question, and 
am, therefore, prepared to tell you in a few closing words what I 
think to be the citizen's duty in the present crisis. As matters now 
stand, the citizen's choice lies between the theory of Immediate Recon- 
struction urged by the President, and that of Constitutional Reconstruc- 
tion ])ro2:)osed by Congress ; and my conclusion is, that the joeople ought 
to defeat the former, and thoroughly sustain the latter. This is just 
what I am trying to do ; and when I come to vote, I shall vote just 
as I have preached, I believe that the people ought to say to the 
President, that the President of these United States must learn to 
confine his action to the duties of his office as prescribed by the Con- 
stitution ; that the legislative powers of this Government are vested 
in the Congress of the United States ; that when Congress passes 
laws, it is the duty of the President to execute them ; that the spec- 
tacle of the President perambulating the country, and denouncing a 
coordinate branch of the Government, is not agreeable to the moral 
sense of the American people ; and especially, that on so great a 
question as that of reconstruction, the nation wants no summary 
judgment merely on Presidential authority. These things the people 
ought to say to their President. It will, I hope, do the President 
good to hear them, and the nation good to say them, and all future 
Presidents good to know that they have been said. I further believe 
that the people ought as distinctly to say to those communities that 
engaged in rebellion and treason, that, having conquered them in 
war, they expect to dictate the terms of peace, and moreover, that 
while those terms shall not be unreasonable, they shall, nevertheless, 
make treason " odious," and guard the interests and rights of the 
General Government. And I still further believe, that the people 
ought to protect the Freedmen and the loyal white people of the 
South at all hazards, and against all combinations. These things I 
believe. I believe them to be imperative obligations ; and so believ- 
ing I intend to act according to my faith. 

As to party organizations and particular candidates for office, I 
have, in this place, nothing to say. I am with the party that in- 
scribes these principles upon its banner, and will be most likely to 
establish them. I am opposed to the party that does not do this. 
On this question I do not propose to be cheated by tricks, beguiled 
by soft words, sold out by treachery, intimidated by threats, or 
diverted from my purpose by any legerdemain of political leaders, I 



31 

regard it as a solemn duty to vote this Fall, and so to vote as to sus- 
tain the Thirty-ninth Congress, and elect a Fortieth Congress of the 
same general character. This, while it will carry the constitutional 
amendment in the Northern, Eastern, Western, and Middle States, 
will place both the amendment and the nation in the legislative keep- 
ing of safe hands. This will, of course, be a signal rebuke to the 
President; yet, in my judgment, it will be a great blessing to the 
Avhole country. 

Most sincerely do I regret the moral necessity of uttering a single 
word, in this place, adverse to the official acts of the Chief Magistrate 
of this nation. Under ordinary circumstances, I should not do so. 
Party politics, as such, form no part of my profession as a preacher 
of the Gospel. But, my hearers, these are not ordinary circumstances. 
We have just closed a dreadful war, not with a foreign foe, but with 
those who were our fellow-citizens, arraying themselves in the atti- 
tude of belligerents and traitors against the supi'cme authority of this 
Government. To conquer this treason the nation has spent millions 
upon millions of money, and sacrificed thousands of precious lives. 
After a most bloody struggle, the Government triumphed ; and, in 
the mysterious providence of God, the great and good man whom Ave 
had learned to trust, and who had just entered upon his second term 
of Presidential service, fell a victim of murderous assassination. The 
Vice-President at once became the President. That President, not 
considting Congress, not listening to the voice of Congress, has pro- 
posed a method of settling the questions incident to the Rebellion, 
Avhich, if it Avere carried into effect, Avould, in my judgment, be 
exceedingly prejudicial to the best interests of the country. Others 
may think differently, and they surely are entitled to their OAvn 
A'icAvs; yet this is my opinion. The question, too, is so important, 
it has so much to do Avith the general Aveal, and involves so many 
other questions of justice, freedom, and right, that I haA'e judged it 
perfectly legitimate to discuss it in the Christian pulpit. I remember 
that the President is but a man, haA'ing the infirmities that are com- 
mon to flesh and blood, and that, like all other men, he is liable to err. 
If he has erred, as I sincerely think he has, then let the popular judg- 
ment to Avhicli he appeals, revicAV the error and correct it. Tliis Is 
the time, just the time, to read, to think, to hear, to speak, and then 
so to A'ote on the subject, that the principles Avhich fired the zeal of 
this nation in the period of Avar, shall not be uiiAvisely sacrificed in 
the palmy hours of peace. May a kind Providence saA'e the country 
from so srreat a mistake I 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 744 794 



\ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



II 

013 744 794 , 



I36i2malite« 



